good video.. but respectfully, missing one of, if not the biggest feature of this upper receiver group. the 1:5 twist on the barrel. the 5.5" barrel length is able to retain a full rotation of the projectile while spinning the bullet much faster, leading to increased rotational energy on target and stabilizing the heavier subsonic projectiles and allowing them to "open up" on impact much more reliably. this can be thought of like the blades of a blender. Kevin Brittingham from Q (original founder of AAC and previously at Remington and Sig Sauer) has spoken of this in great length and I would highly recommend any firearm enthusiast to listen to the older "Q and A** podcast" episodes, specifically the "Drive In" series. Q, Sig, and now Centurion are some of, if not the only, brands that have this twist rate. a very wise decision by Monty in my humble opinion and something that sets this upper receiver group apart from others on the market. Centurion's 8.5" 300blk upper receiver also has the same 1:5 twist. these are very top tier uppers and, like all things Centurion, entirely underrated. thank you for bringing more attention to Centurion, as they are without a doubt, one of the top tier manufacturers in the industry.
I feel like over the next year or two a lot of companies will make the switch to 1:5 and I think the renewed realization about twist rate is because 8.6 blackout is getting some attention and the 1:3 rate made people realize the 300blk granddaddy use 1:5
Got my 'Americas Rifle' book today! Very cool. I can see a lot of work and research went into putting it together. Lots of information here. Happy I bought it! My book collection is small, but this is a nice addition.
I feel like most .300 BLK builds I see are either very well thought-out to maximize the benefits of the round with a realistic and purpose specific total package, or something goofy that totally misses the point, and hardly ever anything in between; this one is a smart one.
@@happyhaunter_5546 I lived in non-NFA states until a few years ago so the suppression was a moot point. I’d definitely like to build a suppressed SBR since it’s a cool cartridge. My rifles go from 5.56 to 50 Beowulf with no in between lol.
Monty makes some good stuff for sure. When I was in the market for a 308 gas gun, I looked at building off centurions receivers but availability was tough to say the least. Ultimately went with the lmt mars h with 18 inch ss barrel. I will go centurion for my mk12 itch though.
"Using a mid-length gas system on an M4A1 carbine extends the life of the weapon system and increases the weapon’s performance over a carbine-length gas system, according to a detailed study by Naval Surface Warfare Center - Crane". The M4A1 has the SOCOM barrel.
Thank you for the video. However, that wasn't a SOCOM profile barrel. The SOCOM barrels are thickest at the muzzle and chamber ends. Yours is a heavy tapered profile barrel (as it ought to be). M4s overheated due to the barrel profile combined with the carbine length gas system.
The barrel that I am discussing is SOCOM profile. The pictures Monty has on his webpage, he does not have all of them up. When the description by Centurion in SOCOM, it is in fact SOCOM
@@SmallArmsSolutions bring up a picture of a Colt or FN SOCOM barrel and compare it to the barrel you showed in your video (which is not the SOCOM barrel on Centurion's website). The barrel that you featured in your video is the Centurion ENHANCED SOCOM barrel.
Can you explain further why the gas port would need to be enlarged for supersonic .300 blackout ammunition? It seems counter intuitive to add more gas for higher pressure ammunition. Normally you would enlarge the gas port to shoot lower pressure ammo such as .223 wolf out of a gun that is gassed for 5.56mm nato. Thanks for any insight you can provide.
@@SmallArmsSolutions Thank you for the clarification and quick response, I missed the detail about shooting it unsuppressed. I always enjoy your videos.
Just out of curiosity is it physically possible to move that vert grip one slot back? Is there another mlok slot? This might do better with a hand stop. Your hands are really, really close to that suppressor which probably isn't a big deal with subs but with supers...ouchie!
I think the handguard only has one MLOK slot. Barrels this short really benefit from quad rail handguards. MLOK handguards are simply not versatile enough for such short barrels. A chopped BCM QRF would probably be the best option I can think of. Far more flexibility for mounting a foregrip and light.
I haven’t really looked into it, but does centurion do semi custom uppers like that semi regularly? I found a Colt 694x folding front sight in my box of parts and wanted to put together an upper very similar to yours, but with the midlength quad rail instead of mlok. I don’t feel comfortable fitting it to a virgin barrel, and I don’t know any shop that’s offer the service of fitting new FSB to a barrel.
Am I the only one who is surprised at all the combative comments you sometimes get? Like damn, disagreeing constructively is one thing but you don’t even get that consideration sometimes…
It can be difficult. Personal attacks. They love to find the slightest error. But the real kicker is those who think they know what they are talking about but have no clue how the real world works. There are many who fail to realize I am not your typical GunTuber but I have worked in this industry in numerous capacities for well over 35 years. Worked in 31 countries with troops all over the globe. Sometime you just got to say the hell with it. There are people who are incapable of learning. But you get used to these criticisms. Got them when I wrote articles, wrote books, been on TV one of course this platform. Especially when I just want to share my knowledge and experience.
Much respect Chris is a true quiet professional. I don’t think the Instagram generation can comprehend that less than 20 years ago I was issued a stock Gen 3 Glock and a Bushmaster Commando when on a legit tier 1 team. Sure things improve tech wise but there is no substitute for actual experience.
@JohnRambo-zz6gy both are fine. I have my pdw set up with a thermal and the spear with an aimpoint. Both are suppressed. The Sig is cooler but there is no real practical difference.
@JohnRambo-zz6gyRattler is way smaller if portability is a factor. You can get a 9'' Spear LT and still have equal or smaller package than DDM4 PDW for transportation.😂
@@SmallArmsSolutions so are you saying that the AR-15 BCG is inherently a better overall design than the AR 18/180? Or just that modern primers won't be set off by that little strike on the primer that happens when you load a round . P.S Thanks for the info I've accumulated by watching your vids. Your a wealth of knowledge sir!
I bought one new with OD cerakote for like $230, it’s just a matter of finding a deal and then finding them in stock. I had no complaints with the MI when I ran one.
Most of us don’t have a qrf waiting to save our asses and so while lightweight is great in high speed encounters the reliability of girthy tools would suit most people better, long term. I say have both, but choose wisely when running off to deal…
1 out of 1000 times it was useful. On the other hang you are drastically more likely to induce a more serious malfunction you may not be bale to clear. You could put an ejection seat on a car, just because it might work in 1 in a million times, is it worth the risk of the problems it causes? Everyone has an opinion. The US Army’s own manuals say not to force the bolt closed but to perform immediate action. The risk is not worth the reward. One time in a million, thats not worth the fatal failures that jamming an action closed that will be induced. But of course, you are entitled to your opinion.
@@SmallArmsSolutions I think it most likely was a design flaw from the beginning. I am simply engaging in an open discussion with you. I agree that it can cause more problems than it solves. I appreciate the feedback.
Also, just gonna say, I don't think the SOCOM barrel was ever actually necessary. If you run the gun like an LMG, sure, then maybe you need a heavy barrel. But the reason the m4 barrel was failing wasn't just because it was over heating. It was failing because its a government profile barrel and if you watch any full auto meltdown of a rifle with a government profile barrel the same exact thing happens every time. The barrel droops and bursts . That happens because the barrel is heavier at the muzzle than it is behind the gas block so naturally it creates a massive weak point when you heat the barrel enough. A barrel such as the Geissele taper profile would've been absolutely sufficient and again that is proven by Goldenwebb's full auto meltdown where it went 902 rounds of continuous full auto fire and then failed how it was designed to fail(gas tube rupture). The gov profile was always wrong. It's still wrong. SOCOM profile is definitely better than Gov profile but imo it isn't actually ideal. The taper barrel is the smarter engineering solution imo.
@@SmallArmsSolutionsyour reading comprehension needs improvement. The SOCOM barrel should've been a heavy tapered barrel, not a heavier government profile barrel.
My reading comprehension is just fine. If you know what the SOCOM bbl is, it has the M4 step cut on front of the muzzle to attach the front of the M203 launcher, The slots under the handguard are for the rear of the launcher to slide in place. Maybe you should listen more. The SOCOM bbl that Monty made eliminated both cuts. They are irrelevant since the M203 is no longer in use. The original Govt profile was right for what its intended use. Noncombatant units. Troops in support rolls. The problem was it was pushed into primary combat roll when it was not designed for the sustained fire a combat rifle will encounter in combat. Listen up, you might learn something!
Well dude, you obviously know far more than SOCOOM who created that barrel due to overheating and bursting they encountered in combat. You know better than the Army who made it a requirement for the current issue M4A1 and has discontinued the govt profile bbl. I have witnessed destruction test while at Colt of both govt and SOCOM bbl. That bbl Geisselle put out was nothing other than a short version of the Colt LMG with the same thick gas tube. Nobody would carry that Geisselle because it is impractical. Real world SOCOM operators dont carry 6x the average combat load. The SOCOM bbl is ideal for mid to heavy use. The gas tubes were designed to fail first on rifles, not carbines. Mil Spec gas tubes outlast the bbl on M4 and M4A1 destruction tests. Golden Webb fires many commercial grade weapons that doe not represent the mil-spec components. You have obviously no idea about what military requirements are, what the troops demand for real world use and cannot seperate that from entertainment. But whatever. But obviously everyone in the know disagrees with your assessment. Have you ever fired a full auto M4? Have you ever fired one to destruct? Have you ever read any after action reports for SOCOM or regular Army? Somehow, i dont think so. I am not your typical UA-camr. I work in this industry for many diffrent manufacturers including the ones with military contracts. You? Again, sometimes you need to just listen to people with far more experience. I definatly do! You are just not one by a long shot.
good video.. but respectfully, missing one of, if not the biggest feature of this upper receiver group. the 1:5 twist on the barrel. the 5.5" barrel length is able to retain a full rotation of the projectile while spinning the bullet much faster, leading to increased rotational energy on target and stabilizing the heavier subsonic projectiles and allowing them to "open up" on impact much more reliably. this can be thought of like the blades of a blender. Kevin Brittingham from Q (original founder of AAC and previously at Remington and Sig Sauer) has spoken of this in great length and I would highly recommend any firearm enthusiast to listen to the older "Q and A** podcast" episodes, specifically the "Drive In" series. Q, Sig, and now Centurion are some of, if not the only, brands that have this twist rate. a very wise decision by Monty in my humble opinion and something that sets this upper receiver group apart from others on the market. Centurion's 8.5" 300blk upper receiver also has the same 1:5 twist. these are very top tier uppers and, like all things Centurion, entirely underrated. thank you for bringing more attention to Centurion, as they are without a doubt, one of the top tier manufacturers in the industry.
I’m so glad they used a faster twist rate.
Centurion is legit.
Kak has 1:5 as well
I feel like over the next year or two a lot of companies will make the switch to 1:5 and I think the renewed realization about twist rate is because 8.6 blackout is getting some attention and the 1:3 rate made people realize the 300blk granddaddy use 1:5
I have a couple of their C4 rails (👌🏻) and their rifles seem to be greatly underrated. Will definitely buy/build in the future.
Got my 'Americas Rifle' book today! Very cool.
I can see a lot of work and research went into putting it together. Lots of information here. Happy I bought it! My book collection is small, but this is a nice addition.
I wish I had friends like you, all I got out of my friendships are jon boats with holes in them
I've never seen a rearward assist, or heard of it until now. Pretty ingenious and cool. Thanks for sharing.
I feel like most .300 BLK builds I see are either very well thought-out to maximize the benefits of the round with a realistic and purpose specific total package, or something goofy that totally misses the point, and hardly ever anything in between; this one is a smart one.
I know they have great utility I just haven’t had the urge yet.
@@josh656 don't need one necessarily if you have a shorter rifle and don't want the benefits that a suppressed .300 can give you
@@happyhaunter_5546 I lived in non-NFA states until a few years ago so the suppression was a moot point. I’d definitely like to build a suppressed SBR since it’s a cool cartridge. My rifles go from 5.56 to 50 Beowulf with no in between lol.
@@josh656 haha, suppression moot point more like mute point ammirite (I'm sorry)
@@happyhaunter_5546 I see what you did there 😂
Very cool. Was just eyeballing this upper
My main AR is a CM4 mid weight. I love it.
Monty makes some good stuff for sure. When I was in the market for a 308 gas gun, I looked at building off centurions receivers but availability was tough to say the least. Ultimately went with the lmt mars h with 18 inch ss barrel. I will go centurion for my mk12 itch though.
Yeah there stuff is really nice
Thanks Chris and Heather 😀😊😀👍🏼
"Using a mid-length gas system on an M4A1 carbine extends the life of the weapon system and increases the weapon’s performance over a carbine-length gas system, according to a detailed study by Naval Surface Warfare Center - Crane". The M4A1 has the SOCOM barrel.
I love centurion I bought barrels their new Chrome boat care group hand guards
Thank you for the video. However, that wasn't a SOCOM profile barrel. The SOCOM barrels are thickest at the muzzle and chamber ends. Yours is a heavy tapered profile barrel (as it ought to be). M4s overheated due to the barrel profile combined with the carbine length gas system.
The barrel that I am discussing is SOCOM profile. The pictures Monty has on his webpage, he does not have all of them up. When the description by Centurion in SOCOM, it is in fact SOCOM
@@SmallArmsSolutions bring up a picture of a Colt or FN SOCOM barrel and compare it to the barrel you showed in your video (which is not the SOCOM barrel on Centurion's website). The barrel that you featured in your video is the Centurion ENHANCED SOCOM barrel.
Can you explain further why the gas port would need to be enlarged for supersonic .300 blackout ammunition? It seems counter intuitive to add more gas for higher pressure ammunition. Normally you would enlarge the gas port to shoot lower pressure ammo such as .223 wolf out of a gun that is gassed for 5.56mm nato. Thanks for any insight you can provide.
This barrel was shortstroking with supersonic unsuppressed. Needed a can on
@@SmallArmsSolutions Thank you for the clarification and quick response, I missed the detail about shooting it unsuppressed. I always enjoy your videos.
What spring and buffer combo were you using when shooting suppressed?
Just out of curiosity is it physically possible to move that vert grip one slot back? Is there another mlok slot? This might do better with a hand stop. Your hands are really, really close to that suppressor which probably isn't a big deal with subs but with supers...ouchie!
I think the handguard only has one MLOK slot. Barrels this short really benefit from quad rail handguards. MLOK handguards are simply not versatile enough for such short barrels. A chopped BCM QRF would probably be the best option I can think of. Far more flexibility for mounting a foregrip and light.
👍👏👏👏
Chris, how close is the last rifle you showed to the MK 12 MOD H?
How much of a difference is a socom barrel and a hbar barrel? I’ve got a 16 inch hbar. Very heavy but accurate as can be
What would the round count on the stainless barrel do you think?
Does the rear assist "lockdown" on the forward assist groves when used?? If so, do you know of any bolt carrier groups??
No, the charging handle works as normal with the lever pulling it rearward
I haven’t really looked into it, but does centurion do semi custom uppers like that semi regularly? I found a Colt 694x folding front sight in my box of parts and wanted to put together an upper very similar to yours, but with the midlength quad rail instead of mlok. I don’t feel comfortable fitting it to a virgin barrel, and I don’t know any shop that’s offer the service of fitting new FSB to a barrel.
Email them
Should’ve done something to shorten up that stock though
That was my SBR lower. Did not want to change it out
Are the Centurian bolt dual ejectors similar to the DPMS G2 Recon’s dual ejectors?
Duel ejectors are used by several companies
Any chance you’ll review the AMD UIC?
Been trying to get one
What is the twist rate on that barrel?
1/7 6R
it is 1:5 on the 300blk upper
That's cute but now there's 8.6 blk 😉
.300 BO holdouts won?
Wake me up when it gets to be 40 cents a round.
Am I the only one who is surprised at all the combative comments you sometimes get? Like damn, disagreeing constructively is one thing but you don’t even get that consideration sometimes…
It can be difficult. Personal attacks. They love to find the slightest error. But the real kicker is those who think they know what they are talking about but have no clue how the real world works. There are many who fail to realize I am not your typical GunTuber but I have worked in this industry in numerous capacities for well over 35 years. Worked in 31 countries with troops all over the globe. Sometime you just got to say the hell with it. There are people who are incapable of learning. But you get used to these criticisms. Got them when I wrote articles, wrote books, been on TV one of course this platform. Especially when I just want to share my knowledge and experience.
Much respect Chris is a true quiet professional. I don’t think the Instagram generation can comprehend that less than 20 years ago I was issued a stock Gen 3 Glock and a Bushmaster Commando when on a legit tier 1 team. Sure things improve tech wise but there is no substitute for actual experience.
Twist rate?
I believe 1/5. It's on his product page.
@@chazc933 I went and looked after I posted. Should’ve been proactive about it. 1/5 is correct
Ive been looking at that 300 blk out upper if you say its good to go I am getting it
I have a spear rattler and DD PDW and I’ve never fired a single round of supersonic. Thats what regular old ARs are for
@JohnRambo-zz6gy both are fine. I have my pdw set up with a thermal and the spear with an aimpoint. Both are suppressed. The Sig is cooler but there is no real practical difference.
@JohnRambo-zz6gyRattler is way smaller if portability is a factor. You can get a 9'' Spear LT and still have equal or smaller package than DDM4 PDW for transportation.😂
Question, with such a thought out and advanced BCG and bolt why not have a firing pin spring like the CZ been 2 and others?
Not needed
@@SmallArmsSolutions so are you saying that the AR-15 BCG is inherently a better overall design than the AR 18/180? Or just that modern primers won't be set off by that little strike on the primer that happens when you load a round .
P.S
Thanks for the info I've accumulated by watching your vids. Your a wealth of knowledge sir!
Select fire? I love them C4 hand guard rail, but 320$ that’s a little pricey. Midwest has a comparable rail for cheaper
Beats having to get a tax stamp for just a SBR lower.
I bought one new with OD cerakote for like $230, it’s just a matter of finding a deal and then finding them in stock. I had no complaints with the MI when I ran one.
Most of us don’t have a qrf waiting to save our asses and so while lightweight is great in high speed encounters the reliability of girthy tools would suit most people better, long term. I say have both, but choose wisely when running off to deal…
first one to comment!
11:33 re: forward assist; ... but Kyle Rittenhouse
So…..
@@SmallArmsSolutions without it he most certainly would have been shot dead, or?
1 out of 1000 times it was useful. On the other hang you are drastically more likely to induce a more serious malfunction you may not be bale to clear. You could put an ejection seat on a car, just because it might work in 1 in a million times, is it worth the risk of the problems it causes? Everyone has an opinion. The US Army’s own manuals say not to force the bolt closed but to perform immediate action. The risk is not worth the reward. One time in a million, thats not worth the fatal failures that jamming an action closed that will be induced. But of course, you are entitled to your opinion.
@@SmallArmsSolutions I think it most likely was a design flaw from the beginning. I am simply engaging in an open discussion with you. I agree that it can cause more problems than it solves. I appreciate the feedback.
Also, just gonna say, I don't think the SOCOM barrel was ever actually necessary. If you run the gun like an LMG, sure, then maybe you need a heavy barrel. But the reason the m4 barrel was failing wasn't just because it was over heating. It was failing because its a government profile barrel and if you watch any full auto meltdown of a rifle with a government profile barrel the same exact thing happens every time. The barrel droops and bursts . That happens because the barrel is heavier at the muzzle than it is behind the gas block so naturally it creates a massive weak point when you heat the barrel enough. A barrel such as the Geissele taper profile would've been absolutely sufficient and again that is proven by Goldenwebb's full auto meltdown where it went 902 rounds of continuous full auto fire and then failed how it was designed to fail(gas tube rupture).
The gov profile was always wrong. It's still wrong. SOCOM profile is definitely better than Gov profile but imo it isn't actually ideal. The taper barrel is the smarter engineering solution imo.
It absolutely was necessary. The M4 experienced overheating in combat.
@@SmallArmsSolutionsyour reading comprehension needs improvement. The SOCOM barrel should've been a heavy tapered barrel, not a heavier government profile barrel.
My reading comprehension is just fine. If you know what the SOCOM bbl is, it has the M4 step cut on front of the muzzle to attach the front of the M203 launcher, The slots under the handguard are for the rear of the launcher to slide in place. Maybe you should listen more. The SOCOM bbl that Monty made eliminated both cuts. They are irrelevant since the M203 is no longer in use. The original Govt profile was right for what its intended use. Noncombatant units. Troops in support rolls. The problem was it was pushed into primary combat roll when it was not designed for the sustained fire a combat rifle will encounter in combat. Listen up, you might learn something!
@@SmallArmsSolutions no
Well dude, you obviously know far more than SOCOOM who created that barrel due to overheating and bursting they encountered in combat. You know better than the Army who made it a requirement for the current issue M4A1 and has discontinued the govt profile bbl. I have witnessed destruction test while at Colt of both govt and SOCOM bbl. That bbl Geisselle put out was nothing other than a short version of the Colt LMG with the same thick gas tube. Nobody would carry that Geisselle because it is impractical. Real world SOCOM operators dont carry 6x the average combat load. The SOCOM bbl is ideal for mid to heavy use. The gas tubes were designed to fail first on rifles, not carbines. Mil Spec gas tubes outlast the bbl on M4 and M4A1 destruction tests. Golden Webb fires many commercial grade weapons that doe not represent the mil-spec components. You have obviously no idea about what military requirements are, what the troops demand for real world use and cannot seperate that from entertainment. But whatever. But obviously everyone in the know disagrees with your assessment. Have you ever fired a full auto M4? Have you ever fired one to destruct? Have you ever read any after action reports for SOCOM or regular Army? Somehow, i dont think so. I am not your typical UA-camr. I work in this industry for many diffrent manufacturers including the ones with military contracts. You? Again, sometimes you need to just listen to people with far more experience. I definatly do! You are just not one by a long shot.